A) winner of the All-Star B) Team with the best record C) rotate or D) a turn for each A, B and C
2006-06-21 12:29:34 · 16 answers · asked by DODGERS FAN 6 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Personally, I think it should be the team with the best record. I don't like the old system of switching leagues like they used to do. Basing on the All Star is silly. The All Star is supposed to be a game for fun and the fans, don't tie it into the "World" Series.
2006-06-21 13:06:49 · answer #1 · answered by spudric13 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Alternate between leagues. The best record could be really close, so a one game difference should not be enough to give a team home field advantage (except in division playoffs). I am not sure why the Players Association approved having the All Star game determine the home field advantage again. MLB wants the ASG to "mean something", but this is not the way. The PROBLEM with the current system is that players with no postseason in their future will "make" this decision.
The one player that the Royals get to have on the team could determine this very major outcome...
The ASG strategy is to get all the players on each team into the game at some point. With home field advantage at stake, it is more logical to play to win in case your team gets in to the WS. However, since the ASG does not count for anything besides home field advantage, there is no point in leaving players out there for a long time at the risk of getting injured. If everyone on the field had a real stake in the WS, then it might be different.
So if you can't play to win, then home field advantage would be better off just alternating between leagues like it used to.
2006-06-21 19:42:10 · answer #2 · answered by Aemilia753 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
B. The only reason MLB is making the winner of the all-star game get home field advantage is to make the all-star players have something to win but i do like best record better
2006-06-21 19:42:56 · answer #3 · answered by totalstuff8 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
there are pro's and con's for all three scenarios. for the longest time it was on an alternating basis. a few years ago they changed to the winner of the all-star game in an attempt to give the all star game more purpose and meaning. the other scenario seems to have the most merit, however teams play such different schedules so the team with the best overall record in both leagues, is far from necessarily the best team in baseball.
its a real crapshoot......i almost think i like the alternating system the best, nothing to second guess, no speculation, no dependency on others and no arguements.
2006-06-21 19:51:59 · answer #4 · answered by jimmfo 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
B, because it's only fair. This dreck of having the winner of the All-Star Game have home field advantage is stupid. Just have them put a pot of money up (ex. $200,000 per player) and have it winner take all for the All-Star Game.
Home field advantage works in all the other leagues, so why not in baseball? It's long overdue!
2006-06-21 19:45:24 · answer #5 · answered by jasonbondshow 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Team with the best record. You play all season for home field, you put in the work so you can get that advantage. Why should you have to work that hard and not have it because you league lost the all star game.
2006-06-21 19:35:07 · answer #6 · answered by eshamn 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Team with the best record no doubt. All Star Game winner getting homefield is garbage
2006-06-21 19:33:02 · answer #7 · answered by nep1293 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Winner of the All-Star
2006-06-21 20:19:58 · answer #8 · answered by metsfan988 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It should be the team with the second best record so that the team that already has the best doesn't get even more of an advantage.
2006-06-27 11:13:17 · answer #9 · answered by Topher 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
its already the winner of the all-star game, they are not going to change that
2006-06-26 03:53:42 · answer #10 · answered by Southie9 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋